first poster has two post to his credit with the same question. Second poster has one.
I think we have our first double troll alert.
I thought the same thing as you Tie. The first poster talks about harassment - I don't know anything about that!
The second poster has referenced a case that was settled. I read about it and it stuck in my mind because the law firm who represented UPS has contacted me through my former district HR manager.
The class action lawsuit for full-time supervisors regarding salary vs overtime was thrown out, BUT the court opened the door on individual lawsuits by each supervisor based on the merits.
Three supervisors who have worked for me have filed lawsuits and I have been contacted by the law firm representing UPS out of LA and San Francisco to make a declaration for a summary judgment in those cases. I should state also that these are all seasoned supervisors who have worked for many different managers over their career.
This is oversimplifying it but it will give you an approximation of what the lawsuit would entail.
Basically, the supervisors have to prove that they were/are nothing more than following direction for the company and should be paid for overtime and additional meal time for hours worked. (non-exempt)
The UPS lawyers would argue that the supervisors are exempt employees and do not fall under the California guidelines for non-exempt status.
The company would have to show that their job description entails making decisions and performing tasks that qualify the employee for exempt status. (The supervisors get paid a salary and no overtime)
I will not comment about the specifics of cases I am involved in but I can see that there are merits on an individual basis where a supervisor may be able to show cause for non-exempt status.
Also, I did not ask how many cases are pending. I can tell you that I have been involved with this process since last February and the cases are only at the summary judgment stage as I write this.
